?
Four Ways To Reduce Cheating or
How is cheating on a test like snagging a bagel?
By Jill Jenkins
Stephen D. Leavitt and Stephen J.
Dubner’s book Freakonomics examines the story of Paul Feldman who rewarded
his department by bringing a knife, bagels and cream cheese every Friday. He set out a basket with a sign indicating
that the cost of each bagel with cream cheese was one dollar. Ninety-five percent of those who took a bagel
dutifully complied and put a dollar in the basket proving that most people are
honest. When Paul Feldman quit his job
to start a company delivering bagels to other business, he kept data on how
honest people really were. Despite that
fact that Feldman’s business still operated on the honor code requiring people
to pay for the bagels they ate unsupervised, he was able to earn a salary equal
to that at his previous job. It is true
that in companies where the employees did not know Paul Feldman, the percentage
of those who paid was lower, 80-90%, but it was not enough to disprove that
most people are honest. Although putting
an open basket out to collect dollars in an environment where everyone knew him
and liked him, was not as effective as putting out a locked box. No one took the cash out of the basket, took
the basket or the box, but they were more likely to pay if there was an
appearance of security. Furthermore, when the employees liked their boss, they
were more likely to pay for their bagels.
Likewise, in smaller businesses employees were also likely to pay for
their bagels. At businesses where fewer
employees paid for their bagels a simple note indicating that he was going to
have to raise the price of the bagels since not everyone was paying fairly, the
percentage of those paying increase, probably due to peer pressure.
What can we gleam from the bagel
data to reduce cheating in schools? First, like those bagel munching employees
most students are honest and don’t cheat.
They are motivated by incentives: economic (which means grades in school
because that is how we pay them); social, and moral. There are four methods teachers can use to
reduce cheating: first, make it difficult to cheat; second, develop an amicable
relationship with students (guilt works); third, develop a sense of comaraderie
among students; and fourth, make the consequences meaningful and significant.
One: Make Cheating Difficult
Just as collecting
bagel money in an open basket proved less effective than a locked box, failure
to properly monitor students during testing could prove too tempting for
students suffering from wandering eyes.
Technology makes cheating even easier for students who often share
log-in and passwords to make a few dollars or for the friendship of a pretty girl
or a handsome young man. As a result, it
is imperative that a teacher set up her/his room so access to all students and monitor logins and test taking. Be visible. (Don’t you slow down when you see
a highway patrol car on a freeway?) Do not correct papers or leave the room
while your students are testing. Absolutely, do not go to the faculty room to eat a bagel.
Another
problem I encountered while teaching in an affluent middle school was students
who either plagiarized papers or parents who wrote their students papers for
them. In fact, one young man confessed when
confronted that he felt overwhelmed, so his mother sent him to bed and copied a
paper from the inter-net for him to submit.
A colleague suggested a solution: have students write their rough drafts
in class. I took it a step further. On the first day I gave students a prompt,
modeled how to unpack it and create a prewriting activity: an outline or a
cluster. Then I passed prompts out to
groups of four students and wandered about the room helping them as they
unpacked each prompt and completed a prewriting activity. On the second day, I gave each student a
prompt and the class period to unpack it, create either an outline or a cluster
and write a rough draft. I collected
these at the end of the class period and recorded them in the roll book. The next day, the students met in the
computer lab, picked up their pre-writing and rough draft as they entered and
had another class period to type the paper into the computerized writing
program, My Access. Before the next week, I printed each student’s
paper. The next week, I returned the
typed papers to a different student and walked the class through a rubric so
the student could evaluate the paper they were given and make constructive
advice stressing the motto: “Friends don’t let friends turn in bad papers” ensuring
that they would make positive and civil recommendations. The next day, the students met again in the
computer lab, retrieved their papers and were given a class period to revise
their papers. The process eliminated the
problem of parents writing their children’s papers; it reduced the students’
stress because they were completing the assignment during class time and were
given enough support that they felt more capable to complete the work
successfully; and it improved the students’ ability to write.
Two: Create a Positive Relationship
When the employees knew and liked
their boss, more paid for their bagels.
Likewise, fewer students will cheat if they have a positive relationship
with their teacher. Relationships are important
to people. How do you create a positive
relationship with students? Spend time
in the hallway chatting with your students about their lives outside of the
classroom. Complement each student, a
little sugar goes a long way. Find
something positive about each student and send a note home to his/her parent
describing whatever sterling quality or behavior that student possesses. If the child does cheat, use it as a learning
opportunity to help him/her understand what he/she did that was wrong, why it
was wrong, and how he/she could avoid the same errors. Sometimes appropriate restitution is in
order. For example if a student
plagiarizes a paper, perhaps after conferring with his/her parent and the
student, he/she could be given an opportunity to rewrite the paper at 80% of
the assigned value. Be cautious of your
vocal tones. Do not use anger; instead be disappointed that such a good boy
could make such a poor decision. Guilt
is strong force. Don’t attack the child; attack the behavior. Students who made a bad choice must still
accept the consequences, even if they are nice children.
Three: Using Peer Pressure
In
smaller companies with fewer employees, the rate of unpaid bagels was
smaller. Each employee cared that the
other employees might think poorly of him if he took a bagel without paying for
it. Children and adolescents care even
more about their peers’ opinions than adults do. As a result, many will choose to cheat to
please another student hoping to gain his/her friendship. Teachers cannot control
the size of their classes, but they can enhance the effect peers have on each
other. When students are seated in rows
and never allowed to interact with each other, they fail to gain a sense of
community. That isolation can lead to
more cheating. At my former teaching
assignment, the district decided that each grade level would be assigned to
teach Sadlier-Oxford’s Vocabulary in grade seven through twelve. To our surprise, a clever student had
published a webpage with all of the answers making cheating simple. Although the publishers continued to have
these webpages, removed, they would reappear.
As a department, we decided we would approach vocabulary differently. First, we made the completion of the workbook
activities less significant to their grade than the subsequent tests. Second, we organized students in learning
groups of two to four students and gave them class time to complete the
workbook activities collaborative during one class period. Third, we added a variety of learning games to
ensure their learning. Fourth we offered extra credit for students who found
their vocabulary words in their reading. (Mine were Jenkins’ Jewels worth one
point.) Another Jenkins’ Jewel could be earned if your parents signed a note indicating the student had reviewed his vocabulary at home
before the test. Even though the
teachers worked collaborative on the workbook activities, they took the tests
independently. Furthermore, we provided
each student who received a perfect score a small rubber duckie, a valuable
prize for a ninth grade student. As a
result, more students learned the vocabulary and fewer students cheated. When children feel confident in their ability and know the learning material, they are less likely to cheat. When children feel they are part of a community, they are less likely to risk alienating others in the community by cheating.
Fourth:
Incentives
Incentives can be both positive and
negative. Positive incentives can
backfire and result in more cheating if they are too enticing. For example, if
I offered students a new I-Pod for perfect scores on their vocabulary tests,
students would create a black market of test answers. Rubber Duckies are silly,
but lack the value associated with the I-Pod.
The prize or the punishment should not be so insignificant that it does
not have the desired effect. In the book
Freakonomics by Stephen D. Leavitt
and Stephen J. Dubner, a daycare center in Haifa, Israel wanted to reduce the
number of late pick-ups. They introduced
a negative incentive: a three-dollar fine for each child picked-up 10 minutes late. As a result, the number of late pick-ups
increased. The parents rationalized that
they no longer needed to feel guilty about picking their children up late. If the fine had been more significant they
may have reacted differently. If the
fine exorbitant, they would have felt hostile.
Students like these parents need to feel that cheating carries such a
high penalty that it is not worth the effort.
Losing all of the credit for a particular test may not be enough, but a
one grade drop in their academic grade might be. Choose your incentive carefully because a
penalty too large can create animosity and be counter-effective. More important there is powers in
numbers. If the school develops a
school-wide policy on cheating requiring all teachers to administer the same
rigorous incentive, cheating will be reduced. However, this means
administrators need to discipline teachers who do not comply with the
policy.
